What if the Vita had an Apple logo instead of Sony's?

I came across this article, and while reading it, i felt it totally uncovers everything that i feel and believe to be true about power of branding and actual quality of product, that unfortunetly the ps vita might become the victim of it's own logo/brand.

"Call me crazy. Call me misguided. But I preordered a Sony PS Vita the other day.
That's right, I plunked down a $50 deposit at a Gamestop near work, thereby earning the right to own Sony's new handheld game console the day it comes out here in the U.S. on February 22.
I didn't catch too much grief among my fellow editors for doing it, although we have an ongoing debate in the office about how successful the Vita will be. A lot of folks think that the Vita, like the Nintendo 3DS, will have a rough go of it, largely because it's just too expensive at $250 for the Wi-Fi-only version and $300 for the Wi-Fi+3G model.
Part of me agreed. Having played around with the Vita at a few "preview" events in the last few months, I was mostly impressed with the system and its graphical capabilities, which approach those of thePS3. But some of the touch controls seemed gimmicky (in addition to a 5-inch touch screen, it's got a rather superfluous touch pad on the back of the device), the battery life could be a bit better (the battery is sealed in so you can't swap a second one in), and it was hard to overlook the fact that it takes proprietary memory that's overpriced (you have to buy a card to play a game and it adds at least $30 to the cost of the system--that's for an 8GB card).
If the Vita had an Apple logo
on it, wouldn't all these gripes
about price and paying extra
for proprietary memory just
fade into the background?
Something about all that sounded familiar. And then it hit me. Wasn't I guy the guy who paid an extra $100 to step up from a $499 16GBiPad to a $599 32GB iPad? Or more precisely, didn't I pay $100 for 16GB of memory that would normally cost me around $20? And that whole Siri thing, wasn't that a bit gimmicky, too?
I realized then that I was looking at it all wrong. If the Vita had an Apple logo on it, wouldn't all these gripes about price and paying extra for proprietary memory just fade into the background? Heck, with the Vita, you get a whole lot more device for $300 (I'm including a 16GB card in that price) than you get for a 32GB iPod Touch, which also costs $300. A bigger one, anyway, with real gaming controls, not virtual ones.
Worth noting: Normally, I don't like to buy the first generation of anything, but Sony is one of the few companies that makes excellent first-gen devices. I own two of the original PS3s and they're still working fine. It built that first PS3 like a tank--remember, that's when they were charging $500 to $600 for it--and the original PSP was also well-made.
However, when it comes to gaming platforms, hardware is only half the equation. Despite being very well-designed, theiPhone and iPad are the juggernauts they are partially because of Apple's vaunted "ecosystem" that includes an app store with gazillions of cheap 99-cent apps, a substantial portion of which are games.
The one big lesson that Sony could take from Apple is to make its downloadable games cheaper. Most downloadable titles (this includes older PSP games) should retail for less than $3. That's all they're worth in the new world of mobile games, and that's how you help build momentum for the Vita--you make it affordable for someone to build up a library of older PSP games while playing a few new "premium" titles that cost $30.

FIFA Soccer on Sony's PS Vita

I'm personally a fan of sports games, and have played both EA's FIFA and MLB: The Show on the device, and I can tell you that a lot of people will buy the system just for one or two franchises they love. Obviously, Call of Duty coming to Vita would be a system mover. And Madden, if it were done well, would certainly entice video football fans like our own Scott Stein to come off the sidelines and get in on the Vita action.
I can name a bunch of other games that would helps spur sales (The Japanese, for instance, are big fans of the game Monster Hunter, which sparked PSP sales). But at the end of the day, a handful of premium titles will only take you so far. A few hundred good cheap games (OK, maybe a thousand) have helped Apple sell millions of devices, and it doesn't have to lower the price of its hardware to keep selling it.
So despite being more optimistic about the Vita's fortunes than some my fellow editors, I can't help but think that Sony will most likely have to drop the price of the system to $199 or $179 to really start moving units after the early adopters have their fill (in Japan, Vita launch sales were initially strong but have dropped off precipitously in ensuing weeks).
That's a shame because the Vita is worth $250--or even $280 with that damn memory card. Cover up that PS Vita logo with an apple, and some people might even say it was a great deal. Don't you think?"

this article makes some good points, i also believe and it's kind of sad that the vita would sell more if it had sported a different logo on the front for example the one with bitten apple! or Dr Dre Beats or even COD

Considering how much flak Sony is getting for the price (which is fair for this tech and services imo)

and apple gets away with

Wasn't I guy the guy who paid an extra $100 to step up from a $499 16GBiPad to a $599 32GB iPad? Or more precisely, didn't I pay $100 for 16GB of memory that would normally cost me around $20? And that whole Siri thing, wasn't that a bit gimmicky, too?

this is my example of how i believe majority of consumers think/believe in buying products.

My wife got me a Dr Dre headphones for christmas and when i opened the present i wasn't able to mask my dissapointment she said " I thought you were into good quality sounding Headphones, that's why i got you one of the best. they were bloody expensive!" soon followed by
"why are you never happy whenever i buy you something, you're a dick!"

The truth is, i am into headphones and sound quality. and i hate products like Dr Dre beats. there are far more superior sounding headphones out there for that price! yet, on the bus, on the streets, and where ever, there are people feeling smug! proudly wearing them, thinking they have got the best sounding headphones ever made.
maybe all these articles about the vita's gloom and doom, "It's to expensive! it's to niche! i love my smartphone!" etc is not really the true problem. maybe the true problem is (drumroll!!)
its not made by apple.

Believe it or not but products generally tends to fail in a market due to its own shortcomings rather than the brand supporting it. Brand trust is earned by making excellent products. Sony had the strongest brand in tech in the 80's by making the best products. Apple has the strongest brand now by making the best products.

There's no secret to a successful brand this has been proven in business books for decades.

Believe it or not but products generally tends to fail in a market due to its own shortcomings rather than the brand supporting it. Brand trust is earned by making excellent products. Sony had the strongest brand in tech in the 80's by making the best products. Apple has the strongest brand now by making the best products.

There's no secret to a successful brand this has been proven in business books for decades.

So not true, and you obviously don't have a business degree. Product quality has VERY LITTLE to do with successful brands. Look at McDonalds, Wal Mart, P&G, etc.

Apples products in many cases aren't even close to being "the best". The sound quality on iPods has always been horrible. Itunes software has always been extremely slow and clunky. Apple TV is garbage. Macbooks have all sorts of reliability issues from the screens to cracking cases. The iphone has has all sorts of problems with reliability, shattering screens and back plates, yellowing screens, antenna issues, average battery life, etc. Their iOS software is arguably less feature rich and productive than Android. It goes on and on.

What I am trying to say, for pretty much every single Apple product there is a much better alternative.

As for Sony, their issues have little to do with the quality of their products. Their Walkman Mp3 players are some of the best sounding on the market. Their cameras are some of the most innovative and highest rated in the world. Their higher end Vaio Notebooks are in my opinion, supreme quality. Their LED TV's are consistently some of the highest rated TVs out there, etc, etc, etc.

Their issue is the combination of many things but the most obvious to me is the lack of operation efficiency, the volatility of the Yen and increased competition. When Sony dominated, there just wasn't that much competition. Now, even though their products are still superb in many cases, the competition is now competing at their level and often more efficiently.

So not true, and you obviously don't have a business degree. Product quality has VERY LITTLE to do with successful brands. Look at McDonalds, Wal Mart, P&G, etc.

I did not say quality was everything to a successful brand. But if you study the examples you give in this quote - all of them we're good enough and met the job to be done in their markets. We'll have to wait and see if the Vita does the same.

Originally Posted by silvermanor2

Apples products in many cases aren't even close to being "the best". The sound quality on iPods has always been horrible. Itunes software has always been extremely slow and clunky. Apple TV is garbage. Macbooks have all sorts of reliability issues from the screens to cracking cases. The iphone has has all sorts of problems with reliability, shattering screens and back plates, yellowing screens, antenna issues, average battery life, etc. Their iOS software is arguably less feature rich and productive than Android. It goes on and on.

What I am trying to say, for pretty much every single Apple product there is a much better alternative.

If you try to put your bias against Apple aside you'll notice few of your statements are true or relevant. iPod sound quality is good enough for the mass market. iTunes was good enough for most of its years and now it's being phased out by Apple's online services. The plastic MB's from 06-08 had cracking issues but the aluminum notebooks of today does not. The iPhone has the best battery life of any smartphone.

Originally Posted by silvermanor2

As for Sony, their issues have little to do with the quality of their products. Their Walkman Mp3 players are some of the best sounding on the market. Their cameras are some of the most innovative and highest rated in the world. Their higher end Vaio Notebooks are in my opinion, supreme quality. Their LED TV's are consistently some of the highest rated TVs out there, etc, etc, etc.

But not well enough designed.

Originally Posted by silvermanor2

Their issue is the combination of many things but the most obvious to me is the lack of operation efficiency, the volatility of the Yen and increased competition. When Sony dominated, there just wasn't that much competition. Now, even though their products are still superb in many cases, the competition is now competing at their level and often more efficiently.

It's much more simpler than that. Sony has lost what once made it great; disruptive products with the best design. Sony today makes sustaining products not disruptive ones. That's their main issue.

--

I also think most gamers judge the Vita in the wrong market. The Vita will have to compete by being profitable for Sony. Not market share against the DS or the tablet market. The Vita isn't appealing to a mass market which the DS, smartphones and tablets are. Sony's challenge will be selling to hardcore gamers, not the mass market.

Originally Posted by mudshark

You gotta admit tho, their hardware is pretty tight, just over priced.

Not really true. You can't find a "10 tablet as good as the iPad for cheaper. The iPhone is equally priced as most competing smartphones. Nobody can make an "Ultrabook" for as cheap as the MacBook Air. It used to be Apple products costed more than the competition but nowadays that's not the case.

It would sell more. I mean apple is pretty bad with releasing something then 6 months later they release same thing but better. They have changed recently tho. But yes there are more people out there who you throw an apple on it they will buy it and claim it is the best ever then there are those who see sony and want it.

CPU specs aren't everything tho. Both Windows Phone 7 and iOS are very well designed and optimized to be very efficient with less processing power. And the GUI navigation of WP7 and iOS are superior to Android.

CPU specs aren't everything tho. Both Windows Phone 7 and iOS are very well designed and optimized to be very efficient with less processing power. And the GUI navigation of WP7 and iOS are superior to Android.

Yes I def agree
Although google just told phone makers to throw out the menu button which is a great move